Cal Tzedek: Lee Kaplan Responds

Monday, May 30, 2005

Lee Kaplan Responds

UPDATE: For the latest on Lee Kaplan, read this.

Lee Kaplan, pretending to be a Lee Kaplan lackey, has responded to my last post . He will respond again to this post to clarify that he is not, in fact, Lee Kaplan. For the record, he chose Option 3.

I will actually try to address some of Mr. Kaplan's points:

I. "did you know article 7 of the PA constitution sets up "Palestine" with sharia law.and Israel [sic] as the only religion?"

This is mostly true. The article, in English, states: "The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be a major source of legislation."

As a secularist, this is certainly something I have a problem with, although I think it is misleading on Kaplan's part to imply that this is on par with the fanatical theocracies of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the Taliban. The majority of Palestinians are Muslims. Having Shari'a be a source of legislation makes some sense; having it be a major source is pushing it for me, and I do not support that. But I also do not support the stranglehold which the Ultra-Orthodox in Israel have over marriage, divorce, and immigration issues, and the lack of civil marriage in Israel is one example of Jewish law being a "major source" of Israeli law. My point is that semi-theocracies are bad, but neither Israel nor Palestine are on par with Iran or Saudi Arabia.

Kaplan also conveniently ignores the next sentence: "The civil and religious matters of the followers of monotheistic religions shall be organized in accordance with their religious teaching and their denominations, within the framework of law and in a manner that preserves the unity and independence of the Palestinian people."

In other words, there is room for negotiation on this issue, just like in Israel. Each religious community has some form of autonomy, just like in Israel. Shari'aesque law is considered appropriate for most people, but the constitution does recognize that it is not appropriate for everyone.

It is also true that Islam (not "Israel") is listed in Article 5 as being "the official religion in Palestine." But Kaplan did not mention Article 5, and here's why. It goes on to say:

"Christianity, and all other monotheistic religions, shall be equally revered and respected. The Constitution guarantees equality in rights and duties to all citizens irrespective of their religious belief."

Because Mr. Kaplan alludes to "the PA Constitution in Arabic," I looked at it in Arabic. Unfortunately, Mr. Kaplan, Article 5, in Arabic, says precisely what it says in English. I don't need the expensive translators that NEIN "consults" to justify soliciting donations to tell me that.

Does this mean that the PA has fulfilled the promises of its constitution? Hardly. The P.A. is corrupt and authoritarian, although it has fared relatively better than most other Arab countries. But Kaplan clearly wants us to believe that the Palestinians are so barbaric that they have no problem writing out their plans for despotism and signing their names to it or, better yet, writing a fake progressive constitution in English and hiding their true Arabic colors from the world.

The constitution, in fact, is rather progressive, and apart from the first sentences of Articles 5 and 7, it could be a decent constitution for the new State of Palestine. I could find no reference in it to killing Jews. Without changing the subject, Mr. Kaplan, would you like to point it out to me?

II. "Can Ehud cite any major Islamic group in the United States like CAIR, ADC, MPAC, MPCC etc. that has ever condemned terrorism and not made excuses for 9/11?"

Try this link, in which at least two of your groups are reported to condemn the attacks. By the way, the ADC is not an Islamic group, and as a distinguished journalist, you should know that the vast majority of Arab-Americans are Christians.

III. "1.7% of the West Bank is populated by Jews, why can't they keep their homes and live in a Palestinian state like Arabs live inan Israeli one?"

Here you contradict yourself, because either a). You believe that Palestinians are so brutal --as proven by their constitution-- that no Jew could ever be a Palestinian, or you believe that b). Jews can be Palestinians as long as there's a political agreement that allows them to stay. I have no problem with Jews staying in Palestine, and according to the P.A. constitution, neither would the P.A. How many Israeli settlers, though, do you honestly think want to be Palestinians, even if they are guaranteed the protection the P.A. constitution offers on paper? How many Israeli settlers do you think are willing to give up their Israeli citizenship, their privileges in Israel, to stay where they are? If you really think it's more than a handful, then I will say that yes, they should be allowed to live in Palestine, as Palestinian citizens.

You know that your1.7% is misleading. You and I both know that Area C covers 60% of the West Bank. Assuming the 1.7% of the land with settlements is incorporated into Palestine and all 200,000 West Bank Settlers become fully protected Palestinian citizens, would you be happy to transfer all of Areas A, B, and C to the Palestinian Authority?

IV. "Maybe you should go live inside Israel where Arabs have equal rights to Jews except in the imaginations of the Palestinian propaganda ministries."

Arabs have equal rights to Jews according to the Declaration of Independence, just as all Palestinians have equal rights under their constitution. Is the latter necessarily true? Probably not. But it also demonstrates that a state's core documents do not necessarily reflect the reality of its policies. Until recently, the JNF was allowed to sell its land, which is about 13 percent of Israel's "public land," to Jews only. This was just recently overturned BUT: "From now on, JNF lands will be available to Jews and non-Jews alike - though the ILA will compensate the JNF with substitute land for any plot purchased by a non-Jew."

In other words, Israel is compensating the JNF for the inconvenience of not being able to discriminate against Arabs. Does this sound like a state that protects all of its citizens equally? Did an Arab propaganda ministry make this up?

V. "I dare you to prove anything Lee Kaplan has ever written has been untrue."

In "Why You Should Not Donate Funds to Berkeley Hillel" Kaplan writes: "Tzedek is a national organization within Hillel also but was not removed."

Tzedek is NOT a national organization within Hillel. Mr. Kaplan probably assumed this because he googled "tzedek hillel" or something. There are other Hillel chapters with other subsidiary organizations called "Tzedek." They have different functions, and Cal Tzedek is not affiliated with them in any way. Nor is Tzedek affiliated with Brit Tzedek V'Shalom. "Tzedek" is a common word and can be applied to all sorts of Jewish organizations. Tzedek was founded by U.C. Berkeley Students in 2002 and has never been affiliated with any organization other than Berkeley Hillel. Had Kaplan's efforts to keep his exposes "well-researched" extended beyond a cursory Internet search, this fact would have been clear to him.

On a related note, in "Inside Duke's Hatefest," Kaplan places his ego above any semblance of actual events and describes his fantasy of the 2003-2004 year:

"When scholar Daniel Pipes came to speak at U.C. Berkeley, some students from the campus Hillel sought to disrupt his speech and had organized events critical of Israel. I joined some pro-Israel students who were concerned about these activities and expressed their concern on the Internet program, Israel National News. Instead of addressing the problem, Hillel's director ejected the pro-Israel students who had gone on the air to expose the radicals in their midst. On campuses like Berkeley, Hillel has created a monster -- a vehicle for anti-Israel activists funded by the Jewish state's most ardent supporters."

Kaplan's Fantasy Chronology:

1. Announcement of Daniel Pipes' lecture.

2. some Hillel students seeking to disrupt the speech.

3. some Hillel students organizing events critical of Israel.

4 (presumably): Daniel Pipes speeks and is disrupted, thanks to some Hillel students.

5. Lee Kaplan and concerned students address these issues on Israel National News.

6. DAFKA "ejected."

These are all belied by a perusal through DAFKA's own archives. The actual chronology is something like this.

1. Hillel and Jewish Student Union disaffilliate from DAFKA sometime in October, 2003. The reasons why are disputed by the two parties. I will take Mr. Kaplan's word on this.

2. Tzedek members organize a panel called "Meet the Jewish Left" which is held on October 30, 2003. That night, Mr. Kaplan "exposes Berkeley Hillel" on the Tovia Singer Show. Executive Director of Hillel asks Mr. Kaplan to leave the room, and they engage in a lengthy and vocal argument outside. DAFKA students were allowed to stay and politely asked questions at the end. None of them were ejected or heckled (nor had any of them attempted to dominate the question and answer session, nor had any of them been secretly recording anything).

3. Over the next couple of weeks, Mr. Kaplan and people who listened to the show continue to heckle Berkeley Hillel's Executive Director.

4. Sometime in November, the prospect of Daniel Pipes coming to Berkeley is proposed by the Israel Action Committee, although Tzedek was not aware of this until January.

5. In January of 2004, Tzedek appealed to the Jewish Student Union to withhold funds from the event and, when that failed, organized a letter to be printed in the Daily Cal which denounced the event.

6. On February 10th, 2004 Daniel Pipes came, and all sorts of craziness happened. I only know of one Hillel (and Tzedek) member who opposed the event and who did not stay outside demonstrating peacefully the whole time. He did not take part in the disruptions, nor did Tzedek encourage them. Presumably, Lee Kaplan and his concerned students were there, but I think I've made it clear by now that Kaplan's depiction of these events was entirely distorted so as to exaggerate the injustice committed against DAFKA.

In "Ford Funds the Palestinian Left," Kaplan claims that "B' tselem never addresses human rights abuses in the Palestine Authority where misogyny, religious intolerance and public murders of "collaborators" are rife." This is a convenient way to discredit out-of-hand an organization which meticulously documents evidence which contradicts the rosy picture Mr. Kaplan would like to paint about life in the Territories. But he is simply wrong here. B'tselem devotes an entire section to Palestinian attacks on Israelis and another to the death penalty in the P.A. It even has an extensive report from 1994, when most of Israel was lovey-dovey about the Oslo process, criticizing the Palestinian Authority and other political groups for their role in "the torture and killing of Palestinians suspected of collaborating with the Israeli authorities during the Intifada."

So Mr. Kaplan is, at best, far sloppier at research than he claims. The B'tselem dig, however, is particularly insiduous, and I believe it is a deliberate lie which he assumes will go unchallenged by the typical FrontPageMag reader.

I eagerly await your response Mr. Kaplan/Kaplan Fan (and to Other Lee Kaplan Fan, I appreciate your kind words. I will respond to you soon).

-Ehud

Comments:
At the risk of being called a "Lee Kaplan lackey" and since you think Mr. Kaplan even bothers with your vanity website that aparently only you and your girlfriend ever write on, let me say that the translations of the PA constitution in Arabic are definitely NOT the same as the drivel you claim they say in English. In fact, the PA constitution says other religions will only be "tolerated."

Mr. Kaplan's research on his articles is impeccable. He doesn't lie like you do to support the terrorists in the PA. In fact, DAFKA was never "kicked out" of Hillel.
Its student leaders refused to change the name from DAFKA to appease the lefties running thiings in Hillel.

I know Mr. Kaplan. Rather than being a lackey of his, let me say he is a better friend to the Palestinian people than you are, as he exposes the lies and propaganda the thieves and murderers of the PLO use to still try to destroy Israel and prevent any settlement. Two ststeswould mean real prosperity for the Palestinian people instead of unending war as you really espouse.

I also know that Cal Tzedek was removed from Berkeley Hillel for helping the SJP with their divestment program (including advertising and promoting it). This happened after Mr. Kaplan exposed them to Hillel management.

As for there being other Tzedek's at other Hillel chapters, Mr. Kaplan informed me that they allpromote divestment and the same garbage that
CalTzedek as an SJP front does at Berkeley. They are one in the same, even if independently operating chapters of Hillel.

Mr. Kaplan also said to tell you he's very happy you are writing about him all the time,it shows his exposes are showing what a rotten PLO radicalfront your group is and how your realgoalis not peace, but the prevention of a two state solution to create another terror state called Palestine.

He told me to send you this message:

:-P~~~~


For real peace in the Middle East,

A Lee Kaplan lackey
 
At the risk of being called a "Lee Kaplan lackey" and since you think Mr. Kaplan even bothers with your vanity website that apparently only you and your girlfriend ever write on, let me say that the translations of the PA constitution in Arabic are definitely NOT the same as the drivel you claim they say in English. In fact, the PA constitution says other religions will only be "tolerated."

Mr. Kaplan's research on his articles is impeccable. He doesn't lie like you do to support the terrorists in the PA. In fact, DAFKA was never "kicked out" of Hillel.
Its student leaders refused to change the name from DAFKA to appease the lefties running thiings in Hillel.

I know Mr. Kaplan. Rather than being a lackey of his, let me say he is a better friend to the Palestinian people than you are, as he exposes the lies and propaganda the thieves and murderers of the PLO use to still try to destroy Israel and prevent any settlement. Two ststeswould mean real prosperity for the Palestinian people instead of unending war as you really espouse.

I also know that Cal Tzedek was removed from Berkeley Hillel for helping the SJP with their divestment program (including advertising and promoting it). This happened after Mr. Kaplan exposed them to Hillel management.

As for there being other Tzedek's at other Hillel chapters, Mr. Kaplan informed me that they allpromote divestment and the same garbage that
CalTzedek as an SJP front does at Berkeley. They are one in the same, even if independently operating chapters of Hillel.

Mr. Kaplan also said to tell you he's very happy you are writing about him all the time,it shows his exposes are showing what a rotten PLO radicalfront your group is and how your realgoalis not peace, but the prevention of a two state solution to create another terror state called Palestine.

He told me to send you this message:

:-P~~~~


For real peace in the Middle East,

A Lee Kaplan lackey
 
Since when is Dafka a champion of the two-state solution?

The page here seems to suggest they oppose it http://www.dafka.org/Textpage.asp?PageName=WhyDafka

and this excerpt in particular:

"The world needs another Arab terrorist state like it needs a hole in the head. And even if a “peaceful” one was created, it’s only a matter of time before a coup occurs and brings the world back to square one. And the word “peace”, so bandied about, does not mean capitulation and the dismantling of Israel. For to the Arabs that is what “peace” means. This isn’t about 6 million Jews “oppressing “ or dispossessing a few million Arabs. This is about a 250 million strong Pan-Arab Movement seeking to drive 6 million Jews into the sea."

Are you referring to the Elon two-state solution? After all, Dafka did post that on its newsfeed. If so, fair enough, but I'd like to see just how good a friend the Palestinian people think Mr. Kaplan is when they find out that that's what he wants. If that's not the case, I'm genuinely interested in what sort of vision Dafka has for the division of the land into two states.

Ehud
 
Please see embedded remarks:
Ehud wrote:
Lee Kaplan, pretending to be a Lee Kaplan lackey, has responded to my last post . He will respond again to this post to clarify that he is not, in fact, Lee Kaplan. For the record, he chose Option 3.

Anytime someone supports Lee Kaplan it's either him or a lackey? So in other words you shut down debate by claiming responses are all self-serving of Mr. Kaplan. One notes here the only one contributing to your "vanity blog" is yourself and your girlfriend, Lisa. Probably because your ostrich-like appraoch to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is to embrace the PLO and its murderers and cutthroats. YOur support of divestment is an example.
U say:
I will actually try to address some of Mr. Kaplan's points:

I. "did you know article 7 of the PA constitution sets up "Palestine" with sharia law.and Israel [sic] as the only religion?"

This is mostly true. The article, in English, states: "The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be a major source of legislation."

As a secularist, this is certainly something I have a problem with, although I think it is misleading on Kaplan's part to imply that this is on par with the fanatical theocracies of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the Taliban. The majority of Palestinians are Muslims. Having Shari'a be a source of legislation makes some sense; having it be a major source is pushing it for me, and I do not support that. But I also do not support the stranglehold which the Ultra-Orthodox in Israel have over marriage, divorce, and immigration issues, and the lack of civil marriage in Israel is one example of Jewish law being a "major source" of Israeli law. My point is that semi-theocracies are bad, but neither Israel nor Palestine are on par with Iran or Saudi Arabia.
My reply:
Your interpretation of the Arabic is wrong. But then again you'd interpret only to suit your anti-Israel leanings. Palestine certainlyis on a par with SA and Iran. It stages public executions, excuses honor killings, does not prosecute for the murder of Jews, etc. and of course encourages terrorism. Of course again you ignore this because of some inner hate as a secularist of a Jewish refuge in the Middle East or some bullshit utopian paradise that cannot exist among the Arabs who teach their children to be suicide bombers(you'll always find excuses for that as well).
U say:
Kaplan also conveniently ignores the next sentence: "The civil and religious matters of the followers of monotheistic religions shall be organized in accordance with their religious teaching and their denominations, within the framework of law and in a manner that preserves the unity and independence of the Palestinian people."

In other words, there is room for negotiation on this issue, just like in Israel. Each religious community has some form of autonomy, just like in Israel. Shari'aesque law is considered appropriate for most people, but the constitution does recognize that it is not appropriate for everyone.
Reply:
Palestinian "negotiations"include threats and murder. Are u really so naive? So of course the Muslims will respect Christians like they do now?
Are you really from Israel? The Musdlims insult each other by calling each otehr Christians.The ultimate insultis to be called a Jew. Are you really so obtuse you cannot see the difference between pluralisitc Israel and the Muslim-Arab nationalist PLO? How dare you subject fellow Jews to danger as youy sit on your fat ass postulating at UC Berkeley?

U say:
It is also true that Islam (not "Israel") is listed in Article 5 as being "the official religion in Palestine." But Kaplan did not mention Article 5, and here's why. It goes on to say:

"Christianity, and all other monotheistic religions, shall be equally revered and respected. The Constitution guarantees equality in rights and duties to all citizens irrespective of their religious belief."

The above is a lie. It says in Arabic those religions will only be "tolerated." Toleration will end after the IDF withdraws. I dare you to live in Palestine as a Jew then.
U say:
Because Mr. Kaplan alludes to "the PA Constitution in Arabic," I looked at it in Arabic. Unfortunately, Mr. Kaplan, Article 5, in Arabic, says precisely what it says in English. I don't need the expensive translators that NEIN "consults" to justify soliciting donations to tell me that.

You would not accept anything truthful if it bit you on your nose as far as that goes. Your goal is to dismantle a Jewish state and democracy for some imaginary perceived utopia where the Arabs are suddenly peaceful and will treat others of respect. Your Manichean
approach to the MiddleEast at best displays immaturity if there is not an underlying self-serving evil intention or blatant stupidity involved.

U say:

Does this mean that the PA has fulfilled the promises of its constitution? Hardly. The P.A. is corrupt and authoritarian, although it has fared relatively better than most other Arab countries. But Kaplan clearly wants us to believe that the Palestinians are so barbaric that they have no problem writing out their plans for despotism and signing their names to it or, better yet, writing a fake progressive constitution in English and hiding their true Arabic colors from the world.

Ahem. Go to www.memri.org and watch their government tv and sermons then repeat the above. Please,are you paid to propagandize for the PA or jsut that ignortant. Who reintroduced child sacrifice to the world if not the Palestinians. Oh,I know it's Israel's and the Jews' fault.It's always that isn't it Mr. Secular?
U say:
The constitution, in fact, is rather progressive, and apart from the first sentences of Articles 5 and 7, it could be a decent constitution for the new State of Palestine. I could find no reference in it to killing Jews. Without changing the subject, Mr. Kaplan, would you like to point it out to me?

The constitutions of SA and Iran don't say they kill Christians or Jews either.So what? Your reply is sophistry inteneded to decieve.

U say:

II. "Can Ehud cite any major Islamic group in the United States like CAIR, ADC, MPAC, MPCC etc. that has ever condemned terrorism and not made excuses for 9/11?"

Try this link, in which at least two of your groups are reported to condemn the attacks. By the way, the ADC is not an Islamic group, and as a distinguished journalist, you should know that the vast majority of Arab-Americans are Christians.

Lukewarm or lipservice to condemn 9/11 then raise funds for Hamas orIslamic Jihad are the norm for these groups. ADC promotes Islamist goals against Israel. Many Christian Palestinians are secular like yourself and form the communist PFLP that clearly states Israelmust be detroyed.

U say:

III. "1.7% of the West Bank is populated by Jews, why can't they keep their homes and live in a Palestinian state like Arabs live inan Israeli one?"

Here you contradict yourself, because either a). You believe that Palestinians are so brutal --as proven by their constitution-- that no Jew could ever be a Palestinian, or you believe that b). Jews can be Palestinians as long as there's a political agreement that allows them to stay. I have no problem with Jews staying in Palestine, and according to the P.A. constitution, neither would the P.A. How many Israeli settlers, though, do you honestly think want to be Palestinians, even if they are guaranteed the protection the P.A. constitution offers on paper? How many Israeli settlers do you think are willing to give up their Israeli citizenship, their privileges in Israel, to stay where they are? If you really think it's more than a handful, then I will say that yes, they should be allowed to live in Palestine, as Palestinian citizens.

You know that your1.7% is misleading. You and I both know that Area C covers 60% of the West Bank. Assuming the 1.7% of the land with settlements is incorporated into Palestine and all 200,000 West Bank Settlers become fully protected Palestinian citizens, would you be happy to transfer all of Areas A, B, and C to the Palestinian Authority?

My reply:
As usual YOU LIE to boslter your position.76%of the West Bank is uninhabited. The settlements do take up only 1.7%.In any case, why can Arabs in Israel walk the streets without fear of being shot or stabbed by Jews but Jews in the disputed territories have to be murdered? The settlemetns were built also on government lands,not from appropriated personalArab property.
But you'llcontinue the lie,won'tyou?
In cases of eminent domain the Israeli governement paid for the property and allows its courts to ajudicate disputes. Why do you insist on lying and speaking in ellipses? is that part of your being a secualr revolutionary?
U say:
IV. "Maybe you should go live inside Israel where Arabs have equal rights to Jews except in the imaginations of the Palestinian propaganda ministries."

Arabs have equal rights to Jews according to the Declaration of Independence, just as all Palestinians have equal rights under their constitution. Is the latter necessarily true? Probably not. But it also demonstrates that a state's core documents do not necessarily reflect the reality of its policies. Until recently, the JNF was allowed to sell its land, which is about 13 percent of Israel's "public land," to Jews only. This was just recently overturned BUT: "From now on, JNF lands will be available to Jews and non-Jews alike - though the ILA will compensate the JNF with substitute land for any plot purchased by a non-Jew."

In other words, Israel is compensating the JNF for the inconvenience of not being able to discriminate against Arabs. Does this sound like a state that protects all of its citizens equally? Did an Arab propaganda ministry make this up?

My reply:
I bet you beleive in affirmative action. Israel has equal rights for all religions and ethncities. Consider the 13%set aside by teh jewish agency an affirmative action program for Jews. Israelalso has affirmative action programs for Arabs who receive preference at its universities over Jews,even veterans. As usual,you speak in ellipses.

U say:

V. "I dare you to prove anything Lee Kaplan has ever written has been untrue."

In "Why You Should Not Donate Funds to Berkeley Hillel" Kaplan writes: "Tzedek is a national organization within Hillel also but was not removed."

Tzedek is NOT a national organization within Hillel. Mr. Kaplan probably assumed this because he googled "tzedek hillel" or something. There are other Hillel chapters with other subsidiary organizations called "Tzedek." They have different functions, and Cal Tzedek is not affiliated with them in any way. Nor is Tzedek affiliated with Brit Tzedek V'Shalom. "Tzedek" is a common word and can be applied to all sorts of Jewish organizations. Tzedek was founded by U.C. Berkeley Students in 2002 and has never been affiliated with any organization other than Berkeley Hillel. Had Kaplan's efforts to keep his exposes "well-researched" extended beyond a cursory Internet search, this fact would have been clear to him.
Reply:
Tzedek chapters at other Hillels mysteriously all support divestment.
Your reply is disingenuous. Are tehy run by a central national authoirty? Maybe not. But they spout the same dogma you do and use the same name.
No different with DAFKA.
U say:
On a related note, in "Inside Duke's Hatefest," Kaplan places his ego above any semblance of actual events and describes his fantasy of the 2003-2004 year:

"When scholar Daniel Pipes came to speak at U.C. Berkeley, some students from the campus Hillel sought to disrupt his speech and had organized events critical of Israel. I joined some pro-Israel students who were concerned about these activities and expressed their concern on the Internet program, Israel National News. Instead of addressing the problem, Hillel's director ejected the pro-Israel students who had gone on the air to expose the radicals in their midst. On campuses like Berkeley, Hillel has created a monster -- a vehicle for anti-Israel activists funded by the Jewish state's most ardent supporters."

Reply:

Adam Weisburg is not anti-Israel. But he is ignorant.And he is a bureaucrat who would rather bury his head in teh sand when it comes to fake "Jewish" groupsand "secular"people like yougetinto Hillelto damage Israel intentionally.
U say:

Kaplan's Fantasy Chronology:

1. Announcement of Daniel Pipes' lecture.

2. some Hillel students seeking to disrupt the speech.

3. some Hillel students organizing events critical of Israel.

4 (presumably): Daniel Pipes speeks and is disrupted, thanks to some Hillel students.

5. Lee Kaplan and concerned students address these issues on Israel National News.

My reply:
Tzedek sent out an ad urging people
to disrupt Pipe's speech along with the SJP.Kaplan notified Hillel donors. These are the facts. That is why Tzedek is gone.In fact, he notified Weisburg that if he didn't do somethng about it,his career was over as should have been.
U say:
6. DAFKA "ejected."

DAFKA was not "ejected." Weisburg himself says so. Point of fact, he tried to keepMr.Kaplan from helping DAFKA and demands were made to change the name which students refused since aid wouldcome only if they were indeed DAFKA.

These are all belied by a perusal through DAFKA's own archives. The actual chronology is something like this.
u say:
1. Hillel and Jewish Student Union disaffilliate from DAFKA sometime in October, 2003. The reasons why are disputed by the two parties. I will take Mr. Kaplan's word on this.

2. Tzedek members organize a panel called "Meet the Jewish Left" which is held on October 30, 2003. That night, Mr. Kaplan "exposes Berkeley Hillel" on the Tovia Singer Show. Executive Director of Hillel asks Mr. Kaplan to leave the room, and they engage in a lengthy and vocal argument outside. DAFKA students were allowed to stay and politely asked questions at the end. None of them were ejected or heckled (nor had any of them attempted to dominate the question and answer session, nor had any of them been secretly recording anything).

3. Over the next couple of weeks, Mr. Kaplan and people who listened to the show continue to heckle Berkeley Hillel's Executive Director.

4. Sometime in November, the prospect of Daniel Pipes coming to Berkeley is proposed by the Israel Action Committee, although Tzedek was not aware of this until January.

Reply:
DanielPipes wasinvited due to pressure by Mr. Kaplan and Hillel donors after he proved Hillel was being sued for anti-Israel activities and to encourage divestment. Those are the facts. Weisburg's ass was on the line.after the Tovia Singer show Hillelhadmillions withheld by donors for good reasons. In fact,this was why Pipeswasinvited but Weisburg tried to remove Mr. Kaplan'said. A vote was heldof the left oriented groups of the IAC and DaFKA's students were not even told about it as they voted to keep DAFKA and ZOA out. Tzedek got itsselfremoved after Kaplan notified donors they were advocating the disruption of the Pipes speech, which they did, plusdivestment from Israel. These are the facts.
U say:
5. In January of 2004, Tzedek appealed to the Jewish Student Union to withhold funds from the event and, when that failed, organized a letter to be printed in the Daily Cal which denounced the event.

6. On February 10th, 2004 Daniel Pipes came, and all sorts of craziness happened. I only know of one Hillel (and Tzedek) member who opposed the event and who did not stay outside demonstrating peacefully the whole time. He did not take part in the disruptions, nor did Tzedek encourage them. Presumably, Lee Kaplan and his concerned students were there, but I think I've made it clear by now that Kaplan's depiction of these events was entirely distorted so as to exaggerate the injustice committed against DAFKA.

Reply:
Events distorted,eh? It's clear u do not live in realtiy.
U say:
In "Ford Funds the Palestinian Left," Kaplan claims that "B' tselem never addresses human rights abuses in the Palestine Authority where misogyny, religious intolerance and public murders of "collaborators" are rife." This is a convenient way to discredit out-of-hand an organization which meticulously documents evidence which contradicts the rosy picture Mr. Kaplan would like to paint about life in the Territories. But he is simply wrong here. B'tselem devotes an entire section to Palestinian attacks on Israelis and another to the death penalty in the P.A. It even has an extensive report from 1994, when most of Israel was lovey-dovey about the Oslo process, criticizing the Palestinian Authority and other political groups for their role in "the torture and killing of Palestinians suspected of collaborating with the Israeli authorities during the Intifada."

Reply:

B'tselem is run by Israel's communist party. It's "meticulous research" is designed to aid the PLO.Anat Biletzki et althe otehrslike you havethe same
agenda:helpthe PLO with propaganda to create some mythical utopia.
That is, those of you who are not apid off by teh EU. The article you sepak about has been praised in academic circles and Ford changed its policies after it broke.
U say:
So Mr. Kaplan is, at best, far sloppier at research than he claims. The B'tselem dig, however, is particularly insiduous, and I believe it is a deliberate lie which he assumes will go unchallenged by the typical FrontPageMag reader.

Reply:
your support of terrorism,divestment that hurts Jewish children and the economy, your excusing terrorist
attacks and not supporting Israel'sdemocracy against Arab dictatorship arewaht's insidious.
To accuse Mr. Kaplan of a "deliberate lie" is a cheap shot.
YOur attacks on him and Isrel have been replete with lies.Who'sknown and respected worldwide as an investigative reporter and appears\on national radioand TV,
Mr.Kaplan or you who is the only contributor to your own blog? Mr.Kaplan is apid by news organizations for his research. All you do is blow hot air for the PLO.
U say:
I eagerly await your response Mr. Kaplan/Kaplan Fan (and to Other Lee Kaplan Fan, I appreciate your kind words. I will respond to you soon).

Reply

You just got it.And other Lee Kaplan Fan, the only hot air here comes from Ehud.

# posted by Cal Tzedek : 9:47 PM
 
Thanks Lee for really making my afternoon. Perhaps your medication is in need of adjustment, judging by your typing. Anyhow, if you think for one moment that you were in a position to threaten anyone's job (even at Hillel) then you are far more delusional that even I expected. The last time I looked Hillel seemed to be doing quite well and the director is still there. Dafka ended at Cal because there were no students to run it, and it looks like Dafka has been reduced to "virtual" movement at every campus listed on the website.
 
Please lay off Kaplan.

Anyone who has spent more than a couple of minutes with the guy will know he is delusional.

Please do not make fun of the mentally ill.
 
Lee Kaplan opposes terrorism and support for totalitarian leaders and is mentally ill? Would that we had more such mentally ill people in this world. Cal Tzedek is a joke.
 
That's as maybe, but Kaplan just ain't playing with a full deck.
 
I'm happy that so many people post info about adware on their blogs; I am the owner of an adware pro website; I'd glad if you pay me a visit. You'll probably find useful info for your next adware related posts.
 
Nice blog. Please check out my comprehensive international health insurance
site. It is all about comprehensive international health insurance
informations.
 
Informative blog you have here. Here is mine child health
 
Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!

I have a business marketing online safelist site/blog. It pretty much covers business marketing online safelist related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time :-)
 
I am totally nude come see me. Take a bit for all pics and movies to load.

Why do I do this I like to make men blow their jiz in their pants.

Visit me.性爱
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
|

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?